Literature DB >> 33842972

Current perspectives on wearable rhythm recordings for clinical decision-making: the wEHRAbles 2 survey.

Martin Manninger1, David Zweiker1,2, Emma Svennberg3, Sofia Chatzikyriakou4, Nikola Pavlovic5, Junaid A B Zaman6,7, Bratislav Kircanski8, Radoslaw Lenarczyk9, Philippe Vanduynhoven10, Jedrzej Kosiuk11, Tatjana Potpara12,13, David Duncker14.   

Abstract

Novel wearable devices for heart rhythm analysis using either photoplethysmography (PPG) or electrocardiogram (ECG) are in daily clinical practice. This survey aimed to assess impact of these technologies on physicians' clinical decision-making and to define, how data from these devices should be presented and integrated into clinical practice. The online survey included 22 questions, focusing on the diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (AF) based on wearable rhythm device recordings, suitable indications for wearable rhythm devices, data presentation and processing, reimbursement, and future perspectives. A total of 539 respondents {median age 38 [interquartile range (IQR) 34-46] years, 29% female} from 51 countries world-wide completed the survey. Whilst most respondents would diagnose AF (83%), fewer would initiate oral anticoagulation therapy based on a single-lead ECG tracing. Significantly fewer still (27%) would make the diagnosis based on PPG-based tracing. Wearable ECG technology is acceptable for the majority of respondents for screening, diagnostics, monitoring, and follow-up of arrhythmia patients, while respondents were more reluctant to use PPG technology for these indications. Most respondents (74%) would advocate systematic screening for AF using wearable rhythm devices, starting at patients' median age of 60 (IQR 50-65) years. Thirty-six percent of respondents stated that there is no reimbursement for diagnostics involving wearable rhythm devices in their countries. Most respondents (56.4%) believe that costs of wearable rhythm devices should be shared between patients and insurances. Wearable single- or multiple-lead ECG technology is accepted for multiple indications in current clinical practice and triggers AF diagnosis and treatment. The unmet needs that call for action are reimbursement plans and integration of wearable rhythm device data into patient's files and hospital information systems. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
© The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Arrhythmia; Atrial fibrillation; Digital health; Digital medicine; EHRA survey; Rhythm monitoring; Screening; Telemedicine; Wearables

Year:  2021        PMID: 33842972     DOI: 10.1093/europace/euab064

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Europace        ISSN: 1099-5129            Impact factor:   5.214


  5 in total

1.  NICE atrial fibrillation guideline snubs wearable technology: a missed opportunity?

Authors:  Andre Briosa e Gala; Michael Tb Pope; Milena Leo; Trudie Lobban; Timothy R Betts
Journal:  Clin Med (Lond)       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 2.659

2.  High Specificity Wearable Device With Photoplethysmography and Six-Lead Electrocardiography for Atrial Fibrillation Detection Challenged by Frequent Premature Contractions: DoubleCheck-AF.

Authors:  Justinas Bacevicius; Zygimantas Abramikas; Ernestas Dvinelis; Deimile Audzijoniene; Marija Petrylaite; Julija Marinskiene; Justina Staigyte; Albinas Karuzas; Vytautas Juknevicius; Rusne Jakaite; Viktorija Basyte-Bacevice; Neringa Bileisiene; Andrius Solosenko; Daivaras Sokas; Andrius Petrenas; Monika Butkuviene; Birute Paliakaite; Saulius Daukantas; Andrius Rapalis; Germanas Marinskis; Eugenijus Jasiunas; Angeliki Darma; Vaidotas Marozas; Audrius Aidietis
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-04-06

Review 3.  Cardiac Rhythm Monitoring Using Wearables for Clinical Guidance before and after Catheter Ablation.

Authors:  Henrike Aenne Katrin Hillmann; Samira Soltani; Johanna Mueller-Leisse; Stephan Hohmann; David Duncker
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 4.964

Review 4.  Remote Cardiac Rhythm Monitoring in the Era of Smart Wearables: Present Assets and Future Perspectives.

Authors:  Anastasia Xintarakou; Vasileios Sousonis; Dimitrios Asvestas; Panos E Vardas; Stylianos Tzeis
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-03-01

5.  Lessons from a multicenter clinical trial with an approved wearable electrocardiogram: issues and practical considerations.

Authors:  Ki Young Huh; Sae Im Jeong; Hyounggyoon Yoo; Meihua Piao; Hyeongju Ryu; Heejin Kim; Young-Ran Yoon; Sook Jin Seong; SeungHwan Lee; Kyung Hwan Kim
Journal:  Transl Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2022-05-24
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.